HRMN 495-Mini Case Study 2

SAGE Reference

The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Author: Filip Lievens, Derek Chapman

Pub. Date: 2010

Product: SAGE Reference

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857021496

Keywords: recruiting, turban, criterion-related validity, research staff, personality inventories, employee

selection, job choice

Disciplines: Human Resource Management (general), Human Resource Management, Business &

Management

Access Date: March 2, 2023

Publishing Company: SAGE Publications Ltd

City: London

Online ISBN: 9780857021496

© 2010 SAGE Publications Ltd All Rights Reserved.

Retrieved from https://sk-sagepub-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/reference/hdbk_humanresourcemgmt/n9.xml

Recruitment and Selection

Recruitment and Selection

Few people question that recruitment and selection are key strategic domains in HRM. At the same time,

recruitment and selection also have an image problem. First, recruitment and selection are often viewed as

‘old’ ingrained HRM domains. It seems like the traditional recruitment and selection procedures have been

around for decades, which is at odds with the ever changing internal and external environment of organiza-

tions. Hence, practitioners often wonder whether there are any new research-based ways for recruiting and

selecting personnel. Another image problem for recruitment and selection is that a false dichotomy is often

created between so-called macro HR (examining HR systems more broadly) and micro HR (examining in-

dividual differences). It is further sometimes argued that organizations should value macro approaches and

write off micro approaches as not being relevant to the business world. We posit that these image problems

and debates only serve to distract and fracture the field and hide the fact that excellent HR research and

practice needs to take both macro and micro issues into consideration. For example, creating an effective

recruiting strategy (some would describe this as a macro process) requires considerable understanding of the

decision making processes of potential applicants (viewed as micro processes). The same can be said with

respect to designing effective selection systems, etc.

The challenge for many researchers then has been to demonstrate how scientifically derived recruiting and

selection practices add value to organizations. Unfortunately, when the quality and impact of recruitment and

selection procedures for business outcomes are investigated, they are often described in rather simplistic

terms. For example, in large-scale HR surveys (e.g., Becker and Huselid, 1998; Huselid, 1995; Wright et al.,

2001, 2005) ‘sound’ selection practice is often equated with whether or not formal tests were administered or

whether or not structured interviews were used. Similarly, effective recruitment is associated with the number

of qualified applicants for positions most frequently hired by the firm. Although such questions tackle impor-

tant aspects of recruitment and selection we also feel that such descriptions do not capture the sophisticated

level that recruitment and selection research and practice has attained in recent years. This oversimplifica-

tion in large-scale HR surveys is understandable due to the difficulty of getting usable survey data across a

diverse set of companies. However, the goal of demonstrating the utility of recruiting and selection systems

may be undermined by this practice and risks setting the field back if the results are interpreted out of context.

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 2 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

In light of these issues, the aim of this chapter is to highlight key new research developments in recruitment

and selection. The general theme of this chapter is: ‘Which new research developments in recruitment and

selection have occurred that advance recruitment and selection practice?’ In terms of time period, our review

primarily focuses on developments between 2000 and 2007. Given the huge volume of work published during

this time frame we do not aim to be exhaustive. Instead, we aim to cover broad themes and trends that in our

opinion have changed the field.

Overview of Key Research Findings in Personnel Recruitment

In this section, we review recent developments in the field of recruiting since 2000. For an excellent and

comprehensive review of earlier recruiting research, we recommend Barber (1998) or Breaugh and Starke

(2000). Tight labor markets in North America have helped fuel interest in recruiting research and considerable

progress has been made in the recruiting field over the past seven years. As noted above, we especially fo-

cus on research that has practical implications for organizations.

The Impact of Technology on Recruiting

Organizations have had to adjust to the new reality of online recruiting. These technologies have created both

problems and opportunities for organizations. Organizations can significantly reduce costs to advertise posi-

tions by using third party job boards (e.g., http://Monster.com) or through company websites. The inexpensive

nature of online recruiting permits the conveyance of large amounts of information to potential applicants at a

minimal cost relative to traditional advertising venues such as newspapers. Media content can be substantial-

ly richer, including graphics, photos, interactive text, and video (Allen et al., 2004). The potential also exists

for the immediate tailoring of recruiting information to target the needs of prospective applicants (e.g., Dineen

et al., 2002, 2007). For example, after completing a needs questionnaire online, a prospective applicant could

conceivably be provided with targeted information about the organization, its benefit programs, and opportuni-

ties that addresses their individual needs. Along these lines, Dineen et al. (2007) discovered that customized

information about likely fit (combined with good web aesthetics) decreased viewing time and recall of lowfit-

ting individuals, suggesting a means to avoid these individuals of being attracted to the organization. Clearly,

customized real-time recruiting approaches are within the realm of existing technologies.

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 3 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Despite the benefits and efficiencies of online recruiting, a downside is that many employers complain about

the flood of unqualified applicants that can result from online advertising (Chapman and Webster, 2003). This

deluge of applicants can inflict considerable costs on the organization if the online recruiting process is not ac-

companied by an effective and efficient screening technology. The importance of integrating efficient screen-

ing tools and online recruitment needs to be emphasized to a greater extent in HR practice.

Researchers have also begun to focus more specifically on what makes an effective company website for re-

cruiting purposes (e.g., Cober et al., 2004, 2003; Lee, 2005). Specifically, these authors suggest that web site

content (e.g. cultural information), appearance (e.g., use of colors and pictures) and navigability (e.g. links to

job applications and useable layout) are all important for recruiting purposes. Cober et al. (2003) found that

perceptions of the website aesthetics and usability accounted for 33 per cent of the variance in pursuit inten-

tions and 31 per cent of the variance in recommendation intentions. Clearly, investing resources in web site

aesthetics such as the use of pleasing colors, pictures of smiling employees, and easy to navigate functions

such as direct links to application forms can have appreciable benefits for recruiting. A study of Williamson et

al. (2003) provided another practically important finding. They discovered that setting up a recruiting-orient-

ed web site (instead of a screening-oriented web site) was associated with significantly higher attraction by

prospective applicants.

Applicant Quality as Recruiting Outcome

Traditional recruiting outcomes have been categorized into four major constructs: Job pursuit intentions, or-

ganizational attraction, acceptance intentions, and job choice (Chapman et al., 2005). Breaugh and Starke

(2000) presented a large number of potential organizational goals that recruiters, could strive to reach from

shortening recruiting processing to reducing turnover. More research is emerging on these additional out-

comes. For example, although recruiters have always been concerned about the quality of applicants attract-

ed, few researchers have focused on this area. This area has perhaps become more popular recently due to

the concerns about online applicant quality noted in the technology section. Specifically, Carlson et al. (2002)

argued that assessing the quality of the applicants attracted is a useful tool in assessing the overall utility of

the recruiting/selection system. To this end, they provided a useful assessment framework. This outcome has

become an important focus of recruiting research (e.g., Collins and Han, 2004; Turban and Cable, 2003).

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 4 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

The Renewed Importance of the Recruiter

A longstanding debate in the recruitment field has examined the role that recruiters play in influencing appli-

cant decisions. Earlier work suggested that recruiters play either no role or a minor one in determining appli-

cant decisions. However, research since 2000 has confirmed that recruiters, in fact, do play a significant role

in applicant job choice (Chapman et al., 2005). In their meta-analytic review, Chapman et al. tested several

models to account for how recruiters influence job choice. Their best fitting model involved job and organiza-

tional characteristics as mediators of recruiter influence on attraction and job choice. In other words, recruiters

appear to influence job choices by changing applicant perceptions of job and organizational characteristics.

Even more importantly, this influence was most pronounced for the best candidates – those with multiple job

offers (Chapman and Webster, 2006).

Ironically, there is little guidance in the selection literature regarding how to identify and select individuals well

suited for recruiting. Early studies showed that applicants pay attention to and are positively influenced by re-

cruiter behaviors such as being informative and expressing warmth (Chapman etal., 2005) but we know little

about individual differences that may be associated with recruiting success. A recent meta analysis demon-

strated that simple demographic factors (e.g., recruiter sex or race) are not good predictors (Chapman et al.,

2005). However, there are potentially many more individual differences such as personality traits and cogni-

tive ability that may predict recruiting outcomes. We believe that more work on individual differences in re-

cruiting success is critical.

Despite the growing role of technology in the recruiting process, most employers and applicants continue to

value an opportunity for face-to-face interaction at some point in the recruitment process. Employers who im-

plement effective technology-based screening practices find that their recruiters are freed up from the manual

sorting of resumes in order to spend more ‘face time’ with qualified candidates. Interestingly, this is the oppo-

site of what most employers fear when they consider implementing online recruiting and screening processes.

Rather than becoming cold, sterile places, they actually have more time to interact with their top prospects to

connote empathy and warmth; exactly the recruiter traits most associated with applicant attraction (Chapman

et al., 2005).

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 5 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Organizational Image and Employer Branding

It is clear that applicants consider the image of an organization as an important factor for evaluating em-

ployers. Chapman et al.'s (2005) meta-analysis on organizational image in recruiting found a corrected mean

correlation of 0.50 between image and job pursuit intentions, 0.40 for attraction, and 0.41 for acceptance in-

tentions.

In recent years, a lot of work has emerged on how applicants form images of organizations. One simple

mechanism appears to be familiarity. Applicants are generally more attracted to companies that have name

or brand recognition (Cable and Graham, 2000; Cable and Turban, 2001; Collins and Stevens, 2002; Turban,

2001), although it should be acknowledged that being familiar and having initially negative views of the or-

ganization can have deleterious effects on recruiting outcomes (Brooks et al., 2003). Efforts then to invest in

becoming more recognized within a targeted applicant population are generally likely to prove useful for or-

ganizations. For example, for organizations who recruit primarily on university campuses, sponsoring events

attended by students and advertising broadly within the campus community should increase both familiarity

and attraction.

Beyond brand recognition, Lievens and Highhouse (2003) suggest that in forming images of organization in-

dividuals draw symbolic associations between the organization and themselves. This anthropomorphic ap-

proach to conceptualizing organizational image demonstrated that applicants ascribe human personality traits

such as sincerity, excitement, competence, sophistication, and ruggedness to organizations (Aaker, 1997;

Lievens and Highhouse, 2003). In general, people seem to be more attracted to organizations whose traits

and characteristics are perceived to be similar to their own (e.g., Slaughter et al., 2004). Another approach

to organizational image has focused on the issue of corporate social responsibility (CSR), also termed cor-

porate social performance (CSP). Applicants have been shown to take note of CSR information such as an

organization's environmental practices, community relations, sponsorship activities, and treatment of women

and minorities (e.g., Aiman-Smith et al., 2001; Backhaus et al., 2002; Turban and Greening, 1997). For in-

stance, Greening and Turban (2000) found that organizational CSP appears to influence the attractiveness

of a company to applicants, such that all four of the CSP dimensions were significantly related to job pursuit

intentions and the probability of accepting both an interview and a job. Aiman-Smith et al. (2001) conducted a

policy-capturing study and found that a company's ecological rating was the strongest predictor of organiza-

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 6 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

tional attraction, over and above pay and promotional opportunities. These authors and others (see Greening

and Turban, 2000; Turban and Cable, 2003; Turban and Greening, 1997) suggest that attraction stems from

interpreting company image information as a signal of working conditions – a proxy of ‘organizational values’

– and applicants develop an affective reaction to these signals which may manifest in being attracted to that

organization.

At a practical level, this increased research interest in organizational image is paralleled by the approach of

employer branding (Avery and McKay, 2006; Backhaus and Tikoo, 2004; Cable and Aiman-Smith, 2000; Ca-

ble and Turban, 2003; Lievens, 2007). Employer branding or employer brand management involves promot-

ing, both within and outside the firm, a clear view of what makes a firm different and desirable as an employer.

According to Backhaus and Tikoo (2004), employer branding is essentially a three-step process. First, a firm

develops a concept of what particular value (‘brand equity’) it offers to prospective and current employees.

The second step consists of externally marketing this value proposition to attract the targeted applicant popu-

lation. To this end, early recruitment practices have been found to be particularly useful (Collins and Stevens,

2002). The third step of employer branding involves carrying the brand ‘promise’ made to recruits into the firm

and incorporating it as part of the organizational culture. Recent evidence has shown that a strong employ-

er brand positively affected the pride that individuals expected from organizational membership (Cable and

Turban, 2003), applicant pool quantity and quality (Collins and Han, 2004), and firm performance advantages

over the broad market (Fulmer et al., 2003).

Addressing Aging Populations

Whereas traditional recruiting research has predominantly examined attracting young employees from univer-

sities and colleges, looming demographic realities involving a major shift in the age of employees are forcing

employers and researchers to learn more about attracting and retaining older workers. Information about at-

tracting older workers has just recently begun to emerge. For example, Rau and Adams (2004) examined

the growing area of ‘bridge employment’ whereby older workers seek out a semi-retirement opportunity. This

typically involves part-time employment that can serve to supplement retirement income as well as serve to

fill a variety of social and esteem needs in older workers. Emphasizing equal opportunity for older workers,

flexible schedules, and pro older worker policies have been shown to interact to improve attraction of older

workers (Rau and Adams, 2005). Other suggestions for appealing to older workers include flexible compen-

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 7 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

sation and benefits programs, and job redesign to accommodate and appeal to older workers (Hedge et al.,

2006). Clearly, more empirical data are needed to test many of the ideas posited for attracting older workers.

Attracting Temporary Workers

One response to staffing highly volatile work demands has been to rely more heavily on temporary workers,

interns, and employment agency employees. This approach represents a significant recruiting challenge as

employers often offer lower pay, few benefits, and little training to these temporary workers as compared

to core employees. There has been little empirical work examining the attraction of temporary employees,

however, research conducted on cooperative education programs shows that temporary employees tend to

be attracted to many of the same organizational and job characteristics as full time employees. Therefore,

employers offering better pay, prestige, locations, and opportunities for advancement are likely to be more

successful in attracting temporary employees. As many of these employees use internships and temporary

work as a stepping stone to full-time employment, employers would benefit considerably from considering

their temporary hires as a potential full-time talent pool and treat them accordingly.

Applicant Reactions to Selection Procedures

Although recruitment and selection are often viewed as separate processes, recent studies are increasingly

showing that the two processes have considerable interactive effects. Negative reactions to selection proce-

dures have been shown to correlate with attraction, intent to pursue, job recommendations, and intentions to

accept a job offer (see meta-analysis of Hausknecht et al., 2004). Applicant reactions are a complex phenom-

enon. For instance, many researchers have emphasized the perceptions of injustice as the primary outcome

of applicant reactions (e.g., Gilliland, 1993; Bauer et al., 2001), whereas others have called for more behav-

ioral outcomes such as effects on attraction and job choice (e.g., Chapman and Webster, 2006; Ryan and

Ployhart, 2000). What is well established is that applicants make inferences about organizations based on

how they are treated during the selection process. In turn, these inferences might influence how attracted they

are to the organization. In designing selection procedures, HR managers should balance their recruiting and

selection needs and pay attention to the potential effects that their selection practices can have on applicant

attraction and job choice.

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 8 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Directions for Future Research on Personnel Recruitment

Emphasizing Proactive Approaches

Unlike selection research, which has a rich history of exploring very practical approaches to personnel selec-

tion, recruiting research has tended to focus on more distal predictor-attraction relationships. For example,

we still lack simple descriptive information on the specific recruiting tactics used by employers. As a result,

there is a dearth of research examining the effectiveness of particular recruiting tactics and strategies. The

growing body of research on decision processes should help recruiting researchers make informed predic-

tions about the likely success of these specific tactics and provide potential moderators of these approaches.

Likewise, incorporating and refining theories of persuasion from social psychology in the recruiting context

should provide a rich source of predictions about the crafting of recruitment messages. For instance, studies

incorporating the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) can tell us how to craft recruitment messages that are

effective for busy job fairs or for quiet deliberation of information from a web page (e.g., Jones et al., 2006;

Larsen and Philips, 2002).

Another example of such a proactive recruiting approach might consist of organizations seeking to maximize

fit perceptions in order to enhance attraction. For example, through online assessments it may be possible to

identify that an applicant has higher potential person-job fit than person-organization fit. As a result, a proac-

tive recruiting approach would be to emphasize the benefits for person-job fit for that individual throughout the

recruiting process. This might involve presenting more detailed information to that individual on job character-

istics, tasks, roles, etc. The aforementioned studies of Dineen and colleagues exemplify how such a proactive

and customized fit approach might be accomplished in early (web-based) recruitment stages. These studies

also go beyond the notion off it as be inganatural process whereby applicants self-select into organizations.

Demonstrating value to Organizations

To date, recruiting researchers have largely had to rely on logical arguments to demonstrate the value of re-

cruiting to organizations. For example, utility analyses can demonstrate the theoretical return to the company

of employing an effective recruiting system over a weak recruiting system (e.g., Boudreau and Rynes, 1985).

We can also argue that effective recruiting is necessary in order to generate the types of selection ratios

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 9 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

needed to make our selection systems more effective (Murphy, 1986). However, we believe that the time has

come for recruiting researchers to capture organizational level outcomes such as firm performance, organi-

zational training costs, and turnover expenditures to more directly demonstrate the utility of recruiting practice

in organizations. Along these lines, Breaugh and Starke (2000) provided a comprehensive framework for ex-

amining the type so frecruiting goals that organizationscan align with their overall corporate strategies. For

example, as a cost-reduction strategy HR departments could design recruiting practices aimed at attracting

experienced employees who need little training, thereby saving training costs. Alternatively, a company em-

phasizing success through teamwork would benefit from recruiting practices that attracted individuals who are

comfortable and motivated in team environments. Recruiting materials then would display photos of employ-

ees engaged in team-based tasks, advertising outlets could include publications that attract a team focused

audience, and benefits and rewards should emphasize rewards for team performance. Other demonstrations

of value to organizations can be seen in an exemplar paper by Highhouse et al. (1999) which showed how

recruiting image information (i.e., an image audit) can be applied to real world recruiting issues (in this case,

the fast food industry). Understanding how your organization is viewed by potential employees is a first and

necessary step toward determining recruiting strategy. Generating effective strategies to address these im-

ages (such as hiring popular students to work in your fast food restaurant in order to attract more students),

can flow from studying these issues empirically.

Disentangling Content from Method

In order to better determine recruiting effects, researchers are urged to design multiple manipulations for var-

ious recruiting tactics. Too frequently, recruiting researchers have single manipulations of information which

makes it difficult to determine whether the approach to recruiting is driving any observed differences or

whether the content of the single manipulation is causing the effects. For example, in designing a study ex-

amining the role of a recruiting tactic, such as comparing the job opening to a competitor's offering versus a

tactic involving simply providing additional information about the company, researchers should endeavor to

provide several examples of each manipulation so that the content of the manipulation is not confounded with

the tactic. Accordingly, we can gauge the relative effects of the recruiting tactics independent of the job and

organizational content used in the manipulation.

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 10 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Focusing on Job Choice

We know a lot less about behavioral outcomes such as actual job choice than we do about attitudinal out-

comes such as attraction, job pursuit intentions, and job acceptance intentions. What is clear from the few

studies examining actual job choice is that our traditional recruiting predictors are much weaker in their pre-

dictions of behaviors then they are of their predictions of attitudes. We need to pay more attention to multiple

outcomes, longitudinal outcomes and behavioral outcomes if we are to provide organizations with information

that will be practical.

Overview of Key Research Findings in Personnel Selection

In this section, we review recent developments with regard to personnel selection. Due to space constraints,

we refer readers to Schmidt and Hunter (1998) and Hough and Oswald (2000) for excellent overviews of the

state-of-the art of personnel selection until 2000. Note too that this section deals only with developments with

respect to predictors (although we acknowledge there have also been substantial developments in the criteri-

on domain).

Rapid Technological Developments in Personnel Selection

In the last decade, the face of personnel selection has changed substantially due to the increased use of

information technology (the internet) for administering, delivering, and scoring tests (Chapman and Webster,

2003). Actually, use of the internet in selection is nowadays a necessity for firms to stay competitive. The

efficiency and consistency of test delivery are some of the key benefits of internet-based selection over com-

puterized selection. Extra cost and time savings occur because neither the employer nor the applicants have

to be present at the same location.

The good news is that research generally lends support to the use of the internet as a way of delivering tests.

Both between-subjects (Ployhart et al., 2003) and within-subjects studies (Potosky and Bobko, 2004) have

provided evidence for the equivalence of internet-based testing vis-à-vis paper- and-pencil testing. For exam-

ple, Potosky and Bobko (2004) found acceptable cross-mode correlations for noncognitive tests. Timed tests,

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 11 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

however, were an exception. For instance, cross-mode equivalence of a timed spatial reasoning test was as

low as 0.44 (although there were only 30 minutes between the two administrations). As a main explanation,

the loading speed inherent in internet based testing seems to make the test different from its paper-and-pencil

counterpart (Potosky and Bobko, 2004; Richman et al., 1999).

Research with regard to transforming face-to-face interviews to videoconferencing interviews reveals a more

mixed picture. While considerable cost savings are realized from using these technologies, ratings have been

shown to be affected by the media used (e.g., Chapman and Rowe, 2001; Chapman and Webster, 2001). The

increased efficiency of technology mediated interviews (e.g., videoconferencing interviews, telephone inter-

views, interactive voice response telephone interviews) seems also to lead to potential downsides (e.g., less

favorable reactions, loss of potential applicants) as compared to face-to-face interviews, although it should be

mentioned that actual job pursuit behavior was not examined (Chapman et al., 2003).

One of the more controversial technological developments relates to unproctored internet testing. In this type

of testing, a test administrator is absent. Accordingly, unproctored internet testing might lead to candidate

authentication, cheating, and test security concerns. To date, there seems to be relative consensus that un-

proctored testing is best suited for low-stakes selection (Tippins et al., 2006). As a possible solution, some

organizations have moved toward a two-tiered approach whereby unproctored internet-based tests are ad-

ministered for screening purposes only, followed by on site proctored administration of a parallel test for those

passing the online version. Sophisticated verification procedures are then used to examine whether the same

person completed both tests, or alternatively, only the proctorered test is used for final hiring decisions. Other

organizations combine this two-tiered approach with item response and item generation techniques so that

candidates seldom receive the same test items. This requires considerable sophistication as large databases

of questions must be generated and the difficulty level of each item must be determined to ensure parallel

tests are generated each time. Once constructed, however, the organization can reap the benefits of unproc-

tored testing and extend the life of the system by making fraudulent activity less damaging.

The Growing International Face of Personnel Selection

The face of personnel selection has changed not only due to rapid technological developments. The glob-

alization of the economy has also considerably affected personnel selection practice and research. This in-

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 12 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

ternationalization causes organizations to move beyond national borders, as reflected in international collab-

orations, joint ventures, strategic alliances, mergers, and acquisitions. One well-known HR consequence of

this rapid internationalization is the need to develop selection procedures that can be validly used to predict

expatriate success. Research has a long history here (going back to the Peace Corps studies). One of the

problems is that the selection of people for foreign assignments has traditionally been based solely on job

knowledge and technical competence (Schmitt and Chan, 1998; Sinangil and Ones, 2001). However, a re-

cent meta-analysis of predictors of expatriate success (Mol et al., 2005) revealed that there are many more

possibilities. In this meta-analysis, four of the Big Five personality factors (extraversion, emotional stability,

agreeableness, and conscientiousness), cultural sensitivity, and local language ability were predictive of ex-

patriate job performance. A problem with the large body of research on predictors of expatriate success is

that research has mainly tried to determine a list of (inter) personal factors responsible for expatriate adjust-

ment versus failure (e.g., Mendenhall and Oddou, 1985; Ones and Viswesvaran, 1997; Ronen 1989). Unfor-

tunately, there is little researchon designing a comprehensive selection system to predict expatriate success

in overseas assignments.

Another consequence of the increasing internationalization is the need for selection systems that can be used

across multiple countries while at the same time recognizing local particularities (Schuler et al., 1993). This

is not straightforward as differences across countries in selection procedure usage are substantial. This was

confirmed by a 20-country study of Ryan et al. (1999). Apart from country differences, differences grounded

in cultural values (uncertainty avoidance and power distance) also explained some of the variability in selec-

tion usage. Another large-scale study showed that countries differed considerably in how they valued specific

characteristics to be used in selection (Huo et al., 2002; Von Glinow et al., 2002). Countries such as Australia,

Canada, Germany, and the US assigned great importance to proven work experience in a similar job and

technical skills for deciding whether someone should have the job. Conversely, companies in Japan, South

Korea, and Taiwan placed a relatively low weight on job-related skills. In these countries, people's innate po-

tential and teamwork skills were much more important. We need more studies to unravel factors that might

explain differential use of selection practices across countries. In addition, we need to know how one can

gain acceptance for specific selection procedures among HR decision makers and candidates. Clearly, this

is complicated due to tensions between corporate requirements of streamlined selection practices and local

desires of customized ones.

A final pressing issue for organizations that use selection procedures in other cultures deals with knowing

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 13 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

whether a specific selection procedure is transportable to another culture and whether the criterion-related va-

lidity of the selection procedure is generalizable. So far, there is empirical evidence for validity generalization

for cognitive ability tests (Salgado et al., 2003a, b) and personality inventories (Salgado, 1997) as the criteri-

on-related validity of these two predictors generalized across countries. Research dealing with the criterion-

related validity of other selection procedures in an international context is scarce. One exception is a study of

Ployhart et al. (2004) who examined whether the criterion-related validity of various predictors (measures of

team skills, work ethic, commitment, customer focus, and cognitive ability) differed across 10 countries. They

found that criterion-related validity was largely constant across countries and unaffected by culture.

Unfortunately, no studies have examined conditions that predict when the criterion-related validity of selection

procedures will generalize across countries. Along these lines, Lievens (2008) highlighted among others the

importance of matching predictor and criteria in an international context. The importance of predictor-criteria

matching can be illustrated with assessment center exercises. The dimensions and exercises that are typ-

ically used in assessment centers in North America and Europe might be less relevant in other countries.

Perhaps, in a high power distance culture, candidates are extremely uncomfortable engaging in role-plays.

This does not imply that such exercises will be invalid in these cultures. The question is: Are these exer-

cises indeed relevant for the criterion domain that one tries to predict in these cultures? Empirical research

supports this logic. Lievens et al. (2003) examined whether two assessment center exercises were valid pre-

dictors of European executives' training performance in Japan. They found that a group discussion exercise

was a powerful predictor of future performance as rated by Japanese supervisors later on. The presentation

exercise, however, was not a valid predictor. According to Lievens et al. (2003), one explanation is that the

group discussion exercise reflected the Japanese team-based decision making culture.

Another hypothesis put forth by Lievens (2008) is that the predictor constructs (especially cognitive ability) will

often be very similar across cultures, but that the behavioral content and measurement of these predictors

will vary across cultures. For example, Schmit et al. (2000) developed a global personality inventory with

input from a panel of 70 experts around the world. Although all experts wrote items in their own language

for the constructs as defined in their own language, construct validity studies provided support for the same

underlying structure of the global personality inventory across countries. This might also mean that ratings

in non-personality situations such as assessment centers or interviews might be prone to cultural sensitivity

because there is ample evidence that the behavioral expressions and interpretations for common constructs

measured might differ from one culture to another. Future research should test these hypotheses about pos-

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 14 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

sible moderators of the cross-cultural generalizability of the validity of selection procedures.

Development and Validation of New Selection Procedures

One of the questions at the start of this chapter was whether in recent years new selection predictors have

been developed. We believe that three ‘relatively’ new selection procedures have gained increased interest

from researchers and practitioners alike. First, emotional intelligence measures have come under scrutiny in

personnel selection. Although the concept of emotional intelligence has fuelled a lot of criticism (Matthews et

al., 2004; Landy, 2005), a breakthrough is the division of emotional intelligence measures into either ability or

mixed models (Zeidner et al., 2004). The mixed (self-report) model assumes emotional intelligence is akin to

a personality trait. A recent meta-analysis showed that emotional intelligence measures based on this mixed

model overlapped considerably with personality trait scores but not with cognitive ability (Van Rooy et al.,

2005). Conversely, emotional intelligence measures developed according to the ability (emotional intelligence

as an ability to perceive emotions of oneself and of others) model correlated more with cognitive ability and

less with personality.

Second, situational judgment tests (SJTs) are another emerging selection procedure. SJTs present applicants

with (written or video-based) work-related situations and possible responses to these situations. Applicants

have to indicate which response alternative they would choose. Granted, SJTs are not new selection proce-

dures (the first situational judgment tests were already used in the 1930s). Yet, they have recently become

increasingly popular in North-America. SJTs are somewhat of a misnomer because they do not measure ‘sit-

uational judgment.’ Instead, SJTs are measurement methods that can measure a variety of constructs. For

example, SJTs were recently developed to capture domains as diverse as teamwork knowledge (McClough

and Rogelberg, 2003; Morgeson et al., 2005; Stevens and Campion, 1999), aviation pilot judgment (Hunter,

2003), employee integrity (Becker, 2005), call center performance (Konradt et al., 2003), or academic perfor-

mance (Lievens et al., 2005; Oswald et al., 2004).

One reason for the growing popularity of SJTs is that they enable to broaden the constructs being measured.

Research has shown that SJTs had incremental validity over cognitive ability, experience, and personality

(Chan and Schmitt, 2002; Clevenger et al., 2001). McDaniel et al. (2001) meta-analyzed 102 validity coeffi-

cients (albeit only 6 predictive validity coefficients) and found a mean corrected validity of .34. Another reason

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 15 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

is that SJTs can be used to test large groups of applicants at once and over the internet. Finally, research on

applicant reactions to SJTs showed that SJTs were perceived as favorable and that video-based interactive

SJT formats even resulted in more positive perceptions than written SJT formats (e.g., Chan and Schmitt,

1997; Kanning et al., 2006; Richman-Hirsch et al., 2000). Given these advantages, SJTs constitute an attrac-

tive alternative to more expensive predictors such as assessment center exercises or structured interviews

because SJTs can be used in early selection stages as an inexpensive screen for measuring interpersonally-

oriented competencies. A possible downside of SJTs is that they might be prone to faking. Along these lines,

recent research has shown that the type of response instructions affects the cognitive loading and amount of

response distortion in situational judgment tests (Nguyen et al., 2005). Behavioral tendency instructions (e.g.,

‘What are you most likely to do?’) exhibited lower correlations with cognitive ability, lower adverse impact

but higher faking than knowledge-based instructions (e.g., ‘What is the best answer?’). In addition, a recent

meta-analysis of McDaniel et al. (2007) reported that SJTs with knowledge instructions correlated more highly

with cognitive ability measures (0.35) than SJTs with behavioral tendency instructions did (0.19). Conversely,

SJTs with behavioral tendency instructions correlated more highly with Agreeableness (0.37), Conscientious-

ness (0.34), and Emotional Stability (0.35) than SJTs with knowledge instructions did (0.19, 0.24, and 0.12,

respectively). These results confirm that SJTs with knowledge instructions should be considered maximal per-

formance measures, whereas SJTs with behavioral tendency instructions should be considered typical per-

formance measures.

Third, implicit measures of personality have been developed as a possible alternative to explicit measures

of personality (e.g., the typical personality scales). One example of this is Motowidlo et al.'s (2006) measure

of implicit trait theories. They theorize, and then offer evidence, that individual personality shapes individual

judgments of the effectiveness of behaviors reflecting high to low levels of the trait in question. Thus, it may

prove possible to make inferences about personality from individual's judgments of the effectiveness of var-

ious behaviors. Another approach to implicit measurement of personality is conditional reasoning (James et

al., 2005) based on the notion that people use various justification mechanisms to explain their behavior, and

that people with varying dispositional tendencies will employ differing justification mechanisms. The basic par-

adigm is to present what appear to be logical reasoning problems, in which respondents are asked to select

the response that follows most logically from an initial statement. In fact, the alternatives reflect various justifi-

cation mechanisms. James et al. present validity evidence for a conditional reasoning measure of aggression.

Other research found that a conditional reasoning test of aggression could not be faked, provided that the

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 16 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

real purpose of the test is not disclosed (Le Breton et al., 2007).

Improvements in Existing Selection Procedures

In recent years, some interesting developments with respect to existing selection procedures have emerged.

One development consists of increasing the contextualization of sign-based predictors (cognitive ability tests,

aptitude tests, and personality inventories). Although contextualization has also been used in aptitude tests

(Hattrup et al., 1992), this trend is best exemplified in personality inventories. Contextualized personality in-

ventories use a specific frame-of-reference (e.g., ‘I pay attention to details at work’) instead of the traditional

generic format (e.g., ‘I pay attention to details’). Recent studies have generally found considerable support for

the use of contextualized personality scales as a way of improving the criterion-related validity of personality

scales (Bing et al., 2004; Hunthausen et al., 2003). Yet, some questions remain. For instance, how far does

one have to go with contextualizing personality inventories. Granted, adding an at-work tag is only a start to

a full contextualization of personality inventories (e.g., ‘I pay attention to details when I am planning my meet-

ings with customers.’). In light of the fidelity-bandwidth trade-off, perhaps the answer is related to what one

wants to predict. Narrow contextualized scales might be better predictors of narrow criteria, whereas more

generic scales might be better predictors for a more general criterion such as job performance.

Another development relates to the increased recognition that practitioners should carefully specify predictor-

criterion linkages for increasing the criterion-related validity of selection procedures. As conceptualizations

of job performance broaden beyond task performance to include the citizenship and counter productivity do-

mains it is important for organizations to carefully identify the criterion constructs of interest and to choose

potential predictors on the basis of hypothesized links to these criterion constructs. All of this fits in a gener-

al trend to move away from general discussions of predictors as ‘valid’ to consideration of ‘valid for what?.’

This was first exemplified by the taxonomic work on the dimensionality of performance led by Campbell et al.

(1993). This project illustrated, for example, that cognitive measures were the most valid predictors of task

performance, whereas personality measures were the best predictors of an effort and leadership dimension

and a counterproductive behavior dimension (labeled ‘maintaining personal discipline’; McHenry et al., 1990).

Now, it is generally acknowledged that this mechanism might increase the validity of personality inventories

(e.g., Hogan and Holland, 2003 as the best example), assessment centers (Lievens et al., 2003).

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 17 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Another recent stream of research with considerable value for selection practice is that one should be aware

of potential interactions among predictor constructs (competencies). For example, interactions between con-

scientiousness and agreeableness (Witt et al., 2002), conscientiousness and extraversion (Witt, 2002), and

Conscientiousness and social skills (Witt and Ferris, 2003) have been discovered. In all of these cases, high

levels of conscientiousness, coupled with either low levels of agreeableness, low levels of extraversion, or in-

adequate social skills were detrimental for performance. At a practical level, these results highlight, for exam-

ple, that selecting people high in Conscientiousness but low in Agreeableness for jobs that require frequent

collaboration reduces validities to zero.

Finally, recent research is also informative as to what interventions not to undertake to increase criterion-re-

lated validity. For example, it is often thought that social desirability corrections (e.g., lie scales) should be

used when one gathers self-report ratings (e.g., in the context of personality measurement). We have now

compelling evidence that social desirability corrections should not be applied. Schmitt and Oswald (2006)

showed that correcting applicants’ scores had minimal impact on mean criterion performance. The futility of

using social desirability corrections was also demonstrated at the individual level (i.e., who gets hired on the

basis of applicant rankings, Ellingson et al., 1999). Although it is interesting to know that social desirability

corrections are not useful, the question remains as to what practitioners can do when applicants fake (and

we know they do). In fact, isn't it awkward that we ask applicants to be honest when responding to self-re-

ports, while we know that this will lower their chances of being selected. Therefore, various faking reduction

approaches have been tried out. However, most of them (e.g., warnings, forced choice formats) had only

meager effects (Dwight and Donovan, 2003; Heggestadt et al., 2006). One promising approach consists of

requiring candidates to elaborate on the ratings provided, although this strategy seems useful only when the

items are verifiable (Schmitt and Kunce, 2002; Schmitt et al., 2003). Last, it was discovered that faking does

not seem to be a problem when personality inventories are used for selecting out candidates (i.e., a selection

process with a high selection ratio, Mueller-Hanson et al., 2003).

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 18 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Directions for Future Research on Personnel Selection

Disentangling Content from Method

In the past, selection procedures were seen as monolithic entities. Recently, there is increased recognition to

make a clear distinction between predictor constructs (content) and predictor measures (methods). Content

refers to the constructs and variables (e.g., conscientiousness, cognitive ability, finger dexterity, field depen-

dence-independence, reaction time, visual attention) that are being measured. Methods refers to the tech-

niques or procedures (e.g., graphology, paper-and-pencil tests, computer-administered tests, video-based

tests, interviews, and assessment centers, work samples, self-reports, peer reports) that we use to measure

the specified content (Arthur et al., 2003; Chan and Schmitt, 1997; Schmitt and Chan, 1998; Schmitt and

Mills, 2001). Crossing these two features leads to different modalities of selection procedures. For example, a

specific construct such as extraversion might be measured via various methods such as interview questions,

self-report items or situational judgment test items.

This division is of paramount importance because it impacts on virtually all research done on personnel selec-

tion procedures. For example, incremental validity research of predictors (e.g., assessment center exercises

used in addition to structured interviews and self-report personality inventories) that fail to take this distinc-

tion into account are misleading and are conceptually difficult to interpret. Unless one either holds the con-

tent (constructs) constant and varies the method, or holds the method constant and varies the content, one

does not know what (method or construct) leads to the incremental validity obtained. Another example is re-

search on adverse impact. For example, Chan and Schmitt (1997) showed that changing the method of an

SJT (video-based instead of paper-and-pencil) resulted in less adverse impact, even though the content of

the test was not changed. Likewise, in applicant reactions research it is important to know whether applicants

perceive a test favorably or unfavorably because of the content of the test or because of the method of mea-

suring the substantive content (Hausknecht et al., 2004).

Going beyond Validity

Prior selection research has usually taken a micro analytical perspective. That is, the effectiveness of a selec-

tion procedure was examined for predicting individual performance. Several authors (Ployhart, 2006; Schnei-

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 19 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

der et al., 2000; Schmitt, 2002) have argued that future selection research should take a more macro ana-

lytical approach to exert a real impact on organizations and organizational decision makers. This implies that

the consequences of using specific selection procedures should also be ascertained at levels other than the

individual level. Examples are the team, job (occupational), and organizational level.

To date, only a very limited number of studies have taken such an organizational perspective. For instance,

Terpstra and Rozell (1993) correlated HR managers’ use of selection procedures with performance of the

firm. As argued by Ployhart (2006), this is only a first step as this study was based on self-reports of firm

performance. In a similar vein, the well-known study of Huselid (1995) demonstrates that use of high perfor-

mance work practices (e.g., Do companies use employment tests prior to hiring?) are related to better firm

performance. Yet, they do not show that selecting better employees adds strategic value to the firm.

Future research should use a truly multilevel perspective to demonstrate whether validities at the individual

level also translate into differences at other levels (and especially at the organizational level). An excellent

example is the recent study of Ployhart et al. (2006). They showed that individual, job, and organizational

level means personality were positively associated with job performance and job satisfaction, whereas job

and organizational level variances were often negatively associated with performance and satisfaction. These

results highlight the importance of personality homogeneity at different levels (cf. attraction-selection-attrition

framework).

‘Selling’ Selection Innovations

At the start, we mentioned that personnel selection is typically viewed as an ‘old’ and ‘narrow’ domain in HRM.

In addition, it is often viewed in rather simplistic dichotomous terms. One of the aims of our review was to illus-

trate the various exciting developments that have taken place in this field in recent years. As demonstrated,

many of these developments have substantial value for HR practitioners working in organizations. However,

this is only side of the equation. An equally vital issue is to implement these developments in organizations.

One stumbling block is the lack of awareness of these new trends. For example, it was telling that a recent

survey revealed among HR professionals that two of the greatest misconceptions among these professionals

dealt with personnel selection, namely the relative validity of general mental ability tests as compared to per-

sonality inventories (Rynes et al., 2002).

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 20 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Therefore, future research is needed to uncover factors that encourage/impede organizations’ use of selec-

tion procedures. For example, a recent study (Wilk and Cappelli, 2003) showed that (apart from broader le-

gal, economic, and political factors) the type of work practices of organizations was one of the factors that

might encourage/impede organizations’ use of selection procedures. Specifically, organizations seem to use

different types of selection methods contingent upon the nature of the work being done (skill requirements),

training, and pay level.

In a similar vein, we need to find out ways to sell selection practices to practitioners and to overcome potential

resistance (Muchinsky, 2004). Probably, the provision of information about the psychometric quality and legal

defensibility of selection procedures to decision makers in organizations is insufficient. An alternative might

consist of linking the adoption of sound selection practices not only to validity criteria but also to organization-

al-level measures of performance such as annual profits, sales, or turnover (see the section ‘Going Beyond

the Validity of Selection Procedures’). Another way might be to use more vivid information (case studies) to

persuade decision makers. However, even this way of communicating selection interventions to practitioners

might fail. Along these lines, Johns (1993) posits that we have typically placed too much emphasis on selec-

tion practices as rational technical interventions and therefore often fail to have an impact in organizations

(e.g., attempts to ‘sell’ utility information or structured interviews). Conversely, practitioners in organizations

perceive the introduction of new selection procedures as organizational interventions that are subject to the

same pressures (power games, etc.) as other organizational innovations. Although Johns’ article dates from

1993, we still have largely neglected to implement its underlying recommendations.

One possible approach to improving the use of scientifically validated recruiting and selection procedures

is through the increasing professionalization of the field of HR. As more organizations insist on hiring HR

personnel with professional training and credentials, the greater the likelihood that research-based practices

will be valued and adopted in organizations. For example, Chapman and Zweig (2005) and Lievens and De

Paepe (2004) found that trained interviewers were much more likely to practice structured interviews than

their untrained counterparts. We are also hopeful that ongoing learning through professional development

requirements for maintaining professional credentials will further infuse and update practice in the field. Like-

wise, it is necessary for researchers and instructors to engage the professional community to ensure that the

research we are conducting is both relevant and timely.

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 21 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Epilogue

The central question of this chapter was: ‘Which new research developments have occurred that advance

recruitment and selection practice?’ On the one hand our review exemplified many areas wherein both re-

cruitment and selection research might have practical implications for organizations. A key example is the

rapid increase of technology in both recruitment and selection, as showcased by the tailoring of media rich

information in recruitment and the use of videoconferencing and (un) proctored web-based testing in selec-

tion. Other examples are the renewed importance of recruiter behaviors, the value of investing in employer

brand audits and employer brand management, specific guidelines for increasing the validity of extant selec-

tion procedures, the development of new selection procedures, and the adaptation of selection procedures to

a cross-cultural context.

On the other hand, a common thread running through our review is that we have the difficulty of bringing our

message that recruitment and selection matter to the organization across. In both recruitment and selection,

we need to find ways of demonstrating the value of recruiting and selecting to organizations. In recruitment,

this might be done by developing frameworks for assessing the quantity and quality of the applicant pool. In

selection, a macro oriented (multilevel) approach might be needed for showing the effects of selection proce-

dures on individual, group, and organizational outcomes.

FilipLievens and DerekChapman

References

Aaker, J. L.‘Dimensions of brand personality’Journal of Marketing Research34:347–56. (1997)

Allen, D.Van Scotter, J.Otondo, R.‘Recruitment communication media: Impact on pre- hire outcomes’Person-

nel Psychology57:143–71. (2004)

Aiman-Smith, L.Bauer, T. N.Cable, D. M.‘Are you attracted? Do you intend to pursue? A recruiting policy-cap-

turing study’Journal of Business and Psychology16:219–37. (2001)

Arthur, W.Day, E. A.McNelly, T. L.Edens, P. S.‘A meta-analysis of the criterion-related validity of assessment

center dimensions’Personnel Psychology56:125–54. (2003)

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 22 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Avery, D. R.McKay, P. F.‘Target practice: An organizational impression management approach to attracting

minority and female job applicants’Personnel Psychology59:157–87. (2006)

Backhaus, K. B.Stone, B. A.Heiner, K.‘Exploring the relationship between corporate social performance and

employer attractiveness’Business and Society41:292–318. (2002)

Backhaus, K.Tikoo, S.‘Conceptualizing and researching employer branding’Career Development Internation-

al9:501–17. (2004)

Barber, A. E. (1998) Recruiting Employees: Individual and Organizational Perspectives. Thousands Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Bauer, T.NTruxillo, D. M.Sanchez, R.Craig, J.Ferrara, P.Campion, M. A.‘Development of the Selection Proce-

dural Justice Scale’Personnel Psychology54:387–419. (2001)

Becker, B. E., and Huselid, M. A. (1998) ‘Highperformance work systems and firm performance: A synthesis

of research and managerial implications’, in G. R. Ferris (ed.), Research in personnel and human resource

management. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 53–101.

Becker, T. E.‘Development and validation of a situational judgment test of employee integrity’International

Journal of Selection and Assessment13:225–32. (2005)

Bing, M. N.Whanger, J. C.Davison, H. K.VanHook, J. B.‘Incremental validity of the frame-of-reference effect

in personality scale scores: A replication and extension’Journal of Applied Psychology89:150–7. (2004)

Boudreau, J.Rynes, S.‘Role of recruitment in staffing utility analysis’Journal of Applied Psychology70:354–66.

(1985)

Breaugh, J. A.Starke, M.‘Research on employee recruitment: So many studies, so many remaining ques-

tions’Journal of Management26:405–34. (2000)

Brooks, M. E.Highhouse, S.Russell, S.Mohr, D.‘Familiarity, ambivalence, and firm reputation: Is corporate

fame a double-edged sword?’Journal of Applied Psychology88:904–14. (2003)

Cable, D. M.Aiman-Smith, L.Mulvey, P.Edwards, J. R.‘The sources and accuracy of job applicants’ beliefs

about organizational culture’Academy of Management Journal43:1076–85. (2000)

Cable, D. M.Graham, M. E.‘The determinants of job seekers’ reputation perceptions’Journal of Organizational

Behavior21:929–47. (2000)

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 23 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Cable, D. M.Turban, D. B.‘The value of organizational reputation in the recruitment context: A brand-equity

perspective’Journal of Applied Social Psychology33:2244–66. (2003)

Cable, D. M., and Turban, D. B. (2001) ‘Establishing the dimensions, sources and value of job seekers’ em-

ployer knowledge during recruitment’, in G. R. Ferris (ed), Research in Personnel and Human Resources

Management. New York, NY: Elsevier Science, pp. 115–63.

Campbell, J. P., McCloy, R. A., Oppler, S. H., and Sager, C. E. (1993) ‘A theory of performance’, in N. Schmitt

and W. C. Borman (eds), Personnel Selection in Organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass, pp. 35–70.

Carlson, K. D.Connerly, M. L.Mecham, R. L.‘Recruitment evaluation: The case for assessing the quality of

applicants attracted’Personnel Psychology55:461–90. (2002)

Chan, D.Schmitt, N.‘Video-based versus paper-and-pencil method of assessment in situational judgment

tests: Subgroup differences in test performance and face validity perceptions’Journal of Applied Psycholo-

gy82:143–59. (1997)

Chan, D.Schmitt, N.‘Situational judgment and job performance’Human Performance15:233–54. (2002)

Chapman, D. S.Rowe, P. M.‘The impact of videoconference media, interview structure, and interviewer gen-

der on interviewer evaluations in the employment interview: A field experiment’Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology74:279–98. (2001)

Chapman, D. S.Uggerslev, K. L.Carroll, S. A.Piasentin, K. A.Jones, D. A.‘Applicant attraction to organizations

and job choice: A meta-analytic review of the correlates of recruiting outcomes’Journal of Applied Psycholo-

gy90:928–44. (2005)

Chapman, D. S.Uggerslev, K. L.Webster, J.‘Applicant reactions to face-to-face and technology-mediated in-

terviews: A field investigation’Journal of Applied Psychology88:944–53. (2003)

Chapman, D. S.Webster, J.‘Rater correction processes in applicant selection using videoconference technol-

ogy: The role of attributions’Journal of Applied Social Psychology31:2518–37. (2001)

Chapman, D. S.Webster, J.‘The use of technologies in the recruiting, screening, and selection processes for

job candidates’International Journal of Selection and Assessment11:113–20. (2003)

Chapman, D. S.Webster, J.‘Integrating applicant reactions into the critical contact framework of recruiting’In-

ternational Journal of Human Resource Management17:1032–57. (2006)

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 24 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Chapman, D. S.Zweig, D. I.‘Developing a nomological network for interview structure: Antecedents and con-

sequences of the structured selection interview’Personnel Psychology58:673–702. (2005)

Clevenger, J.Pereira, G. M.Wiechmann, D.Schmitt, N.Harvey, V. S.‘Incremental validity of situational judg-

ment tests’Journal of Applied Psychology86:410–17. (2001)

Cober, R. T.Brown, D. J.Levy, P. E.‘Form, content, and function: An evaluative methodology for corporate em-

ployment Web sites’Human Resource Management43:201–18. (2004)

Cober, R. T.Brown, D. J.Levy, P. E.Cober, A. B.Keeping, L. M.‘Organizational Web sites: Web site content

and style as determinants of organizational attraction’International Journal of Selection and Assess-

ment11:158–69. (2003)

Collins, C. J.Han, J.‘Exploring applicant pool quantity and quality: The effects of early recruitment practices,

corporate advertising, and firm reputation’Personnel Psychology57:685–717. (2004)

Collins, C. J.Stevens, C. K.‘The relationship between early recruitment related activities and the application

decisions of new labor-market entrants: A brand equity approach to recruitment’Journal of Applied Psycholo-

gy87:1121–33. (2002)

Dineen, B. R.Ash, S. R.Noe, R. A.‘A Web of applicant attraction: Person-organization fit in the context of Web-

based recruitment’Journal of Applied Psychology87:723–34. (2002)

Dineen, B. R.Ling, J.Ash, S. R.DelVecchio, D.‘Aesthetic properties and message customization: Navigating

the dark side of Web recruitment’Journal of Applied Psychology92:356–72. (2007)

Dwight, S. A.Donovan, J. J.‘Do warnings not to fake reduce faking?’Human Performance16:1–23. (2003)

Ellingson, J. E.Sackett, P. R.Hough, L. M.‘Social desirability corrections in personality measurement: Issues

of applicant comparison and construct validity’Journal of Applied Psychology84:155–66. (1999)

Fulmer, I. S.Gerhart, B.Scott, K. S.‘Are the 100 best better? An empirical investigation of the relationship be-

tween being a “great place to work” and firm performance’Personnel Psychology56:965–93. (2003)

Gilliland, S. W.‘The perceived fairness of selection systems: An organizational justice perspective’Academy

of Management Review18:694–734. (1993)

Greening, D. W.Turban, D. B.‘Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality

workforce’Business and Society39:254–80. (2000)

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 25 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

HattrupK.SchmittN.LandisR. S.‘Equivalence of constructs measured by job-specific and commercially avail-

able aptitude-tests’Journal of Applied Psychology77:298–308. (1992)

Hausknecht, J. P.Day, D. V.Thomas, S. C.‘Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and

meta-analysis’Personnel Psychology57:639–83. (2004)

Hedge, J. W., Borman, W. C., and Lammlein, S. E. (eds) (2006) The Aging Workforce. Washington, DC,

American Psychological Association

Heggestad, E. D.Morrison, M.Reeve, C. L.McCloy, R. A.‘Forced-choice assessments of personality for se-

lection: Evaluating issues of normative assessment and faking resistance’Journal of Applied Psycholo-

gy91:9–24. (2006)

Highhouse, S.Zickar, M. J.Thorsteinson, T. J.Stierwalt, S. L.Slaughter, J.‘Assessing company employment

image: An example in the fast food industry’Personnel Psychology52:151–72. (1999)

Hogan, J.Holland, B.‘Using theory to evaluate personality and job-performance relations: A socioanalytic per-

spective’Journal of Applied Psychology88:100–12. (2003)

Hough, L. M.Oswald, F. L.‘Personnel selection: Looking toward the future - Remembering the past’Annual

Review of Psychology51:631–64. (2000)

Hunter, D. R.‘Measuring general aviation pilot judgment using a situational judgment technique’International

Journal of Aviation Psychology13:373–86. (2003)

Hunthausen, J. M.Truxillo, D. M.Bauer, T. N.Hammer, L. B.‘A field study of frame-of-reference effects on per-

sonality test validity’Journal of Applied Psychology88:545–51. (2003)

Huo, Y. P.Huang, H. J.Napier, N. K.‘Divergence or convergence: A cross national comparison of personnel

selection practices’Human Resource Management41:31–44. (2002)

Huselid, M. A.‘The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity and corporate

financial performance’Academy of Management Journal38:635–72. (1995)

James, L. R.McIntyre, M. D.Glisson, C. A.Green, P. D.Patton, T. W.LeBreton, J. M.‘A conditional reasoning

measure for aggression’Organizational Research Methods8:69–99. (2005)

Johns, G.‘Constraints on the adoption of psychology-based personnel practices: Lessons from organizational

innovation’Personnel Psychology46:569–92. (1993)

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 26 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Jones, D. A.Shultz, J. W.Chapman, D. S.‘Recruiting through job advertisements: The effects of cognitive elab-

oration on decision making’International Journal of Selection and Assessment14:167–79. (2006)

Kanning, U. P.Grewe, K.Hollenberg, S.Hadouch, M.‘From the subjects’ point of view - Reactions to different

types of situational judgment items’European Journal of Psychological Assessment22:168–76. (2006)

Konradt, U.Hertel, G.Joder, K.‘Web-based assessment of call center agents: Development and validation of

a computerized instrument’International Journal of Selection and Assessment11:184–93. (2003)

Landy, F. J.‘Some historical and scientific issues related to research on emotional intelligence’Journal of Or-

ganizational Behavior26:411–24. (2005)

Larsen, D. A.Phillips, J. I.‘Effect of recruiter on attraction to the firm: Implications of the elaboration likelihood

model’Journal of Business and Psychology16:347–64. (2002)

LeBreton, J. M.Barksdale, C. D.Robin, J. D.James, L. R.‘Measurement issues associated with conditional

reasoning tests of personality: Deception and faking’Journal of Applied Psychology92:1–16. (2007)

Lee, I.‘The Evolution of E-Recruiting: A content analysis of Fortune 100 career web sites’Journal of Electronic

Commerce in Organizations3(3):57. (2005)

Lievens, F.‘Employer branding in the Belgian Army: The importance of instrumental and symbolic beliefs

for potential applicants, actual applicants, and military employees’Human Resource Management46:51–69.

(2007)

Lievens, F. (2008) ‘Research on selection in an international context: Current status and future directions’,

in M. M. Harris (ed.), Handbook of Research in International Human Resource Management. Lawrence Erl-

baum's Organizations and Management Series. London: Prentice Hall, pp. 107–124.

Lievens, F.Buyse, T.Sackett, P. R.‘The operational validity of a video-based situational judgment test for med-

ical college admissions: Illustrating the importance of matching predictor and criterion construct domains’Jour-

nal of Applied Psychology90:442–52. (2005)

Lievens, F.De Paepe, A.‘An empirical investigation of interviewer-related factors that discourage the use of

high structure interviews’Journal of Organizational Behavior25:29–46. (2004)

Lievens, F.Harris, M. M.Van Keer, E.Bisqueret, C.‘Predicting crosscultural training performance: The validity

of personality, cognitive ability, and dimensions measured by an assessment center and a behavior descrip-

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 27 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

tion interview’Journal of Applied Psychology88:476–89. (2003)

Lievens, F.Highhouse, S.‘The relation of instrumental and symbolic attributes to a company's attractiveness

as an employer’Personnel Psychology56:75–102. (2003)

Matthews, G.Roberts, R. D.Zeidner, M.‘Seven myths about emotional intelligence’Psychological In-

quiry15:179–96. (2004)

McClough, A. C.Rogelberg, S. G.‘Selection in teams: An exploration of the Teamwork Knowledge, Skills, and

Ability test’International Journal of Selection and Assessment11:56–66. (2003)

McDaniel, M. A.Hartman, N. S.Whetzel, D. L.Grubb, W. L.‘Situational judgment tests, response instructions,

and validity: A meta-analysis’Personnel Psychology60:63–91. (2007)

McDaniel, M. A.Morgeson, F. P.Finnegan, E. B.Campion, M. A.Braverman, E. P.‘Use of situational judgment

tests to predict job performance: A clarification of the literature’Journal of Applied Psychology86:730–40.

(2001)

McHenry, J. J.Hough, L. M.Toquam, J. L.Hanson, M. A.Ashworth, S.‘Project a validity results - the relationship

between predictor and criterion domain’Personnel Psychology43:335–54. (1990)

Mendenhall, M.Oddou, G.‘The dimensions of expatriate acculturation: A review’Academy of Management Re-

view10:39–47. (1985)

Mol, S. T.Born, M.Willemsen, M. E.Van Der Molen, H. T.‘Predicting expatriate job performance for selection

purposes: A quantitative review’Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology36:1–31. (2005)

Morgeson, F. P.Reider, M. H.Campion, M. A.‘Selecting individuals in team settings: The importance of social

skills, personality characteristics, and teamwork knowledge’Personnel Psychology58:583–611. (2005)

Motowidlo, S. J.Hooper, A. C.Jackson, H. L.‘Implicit policies about relations between personality traits and

behavioral effectiveness in situational judgment items’Journal of Applied Psychology91:749–61. (2006)

Muchinsky, P. M.‘When the psychometrics of test development meets organizational realities: A conceptual

framework for organizational change, examples, and recommendations’Personnel Psychology57:175–209.

(2004)

Mueller-Hanson, R.Heggestad, E. D.Thornton, G. C.‘Faking and selection: Considering the use of personality

from select-in and select-out perspectives’Journal of Applied Psychology88:348–55. (2003)

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 28 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Murphy, K. R.‘When your top choice turns you down: Effects of rejected offers on the utility of selection

tests’Psychological Bulletin99:133–38. (1986)

Nguyen, N. T.Biderman, M. D.McDaniel, M. A.‘Effects of response instructions on faking a situational judg-

ment test’International Journal of Selection and Assessment13:250–60. (2005)

Ones, D. S., and Viswesvaran, C. (1997) ‘Personality determinants in the prediction of aspects of expatriate

job success’, in D. M. Saunder and Z. Aycan (eds), New Approaches to Employee Management: Expatriate

Management: Theory and Research. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. pp. 63–92.

Oswald, F. L.Schmitt, N.Kim, B. H.Ramsay, L. J.Gillespie, M. A.‘Developing a biodata measure and situational

judgment inventory as predictors of college student performance’Journal of Applied Psychology89:187–208.

(2004)

Ployhart, R. E.‘Staffing in the 21st century: New challenges and strategic opportunities’Journal of Manage-

ment32:868–97. (2006)

Ployhart, R. E., Sacco, J. M., Nishii, L. H., and Rogg, K. L.(2004, April)The influence of culture on criterion-

related validity and job performance. Posterpresented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial

and Organizational Psychology, Chicago, IL.

Ployhart, R. E.Weekley, J. A.Baughman, K.‘The structure and function of human capital emergence: A mul-

tilevel examination of the attraction-selection-attrition model’Academy of Management Journal49:661–77.

(2006)

Ployhart, R. E.Weekley, J. A.Holtz, B. C.Kemp, C.‘Web-based and paper-and-pencil testing of applicants in a

proctored setting: Are personality, bio-data, and situational judgment tests comparable?’Personnel Psycholo-

gy56:733–52. (2003)

Potosky, D.Bobko, P.‘Selection testing via the Internet: Practical considerations and exploratory empirical

findings’Personnel Psychology57:1003–34. (2004)

Rau, B. L.Adams, G.‘Job seeking among retirees seeking bridge employment’Personnel Psycholo-

gy57:719–44. (2004)

Rau, B. L.Adams, G.‘Organizational Attraction of Retirees for Bridge Employment’Journal of Organizational

Behavior26:649–60. (2005)

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 29 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Richman, W. L.Kiesler, S.Weisband, S.Drasgow, F.‘A meta-analytic study of social desirability distortion in

computer-administered questionnaires, traditional questionnaires, and interviews’Journal of Applied Psychol-

ogy84:754–75. (1999)

Richman-Hirsch, W. L.Olson-Buchanan, J. B.Drasgow, F.‘Examining the impact of administration medium on

examinee perceptions and attitudes’Journal of Applied Psychology85:880–7. (2000)

Ronen, S. (1989) ‘Training the international assignee’, in I. L. Goldstein (ed.), Training and development in

organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 417–53.

Ryan, A. M.McFarland, L.Baron, H.Page, R.‘An international look at selection practices: Nation and culture

as explanations for variability in practice’Personnel Psychology52:359–91. (1999)

Ryan, A. M.Ployhart, R. E.‘Applicants’ perceptions of selection procedures and decisions: A critical review

and agenda for the future’Journal of Management26:565–606. (2000)

Rynes, S. L.Colbert, A. E.Brown, K. G.‘HR professionals’ beliefs about effective human resource practices:

Correspondence between research and practice’Human Resource Management41:149–74. (2002)

Salgado, J. F.‘The Five-Factor model of personality and job performance in the European Community’Journal

of Applied Psychology82:30–43. (1997)

Salgado, J. F.Anderson, N.Moscoso, S.Bertua, C.De Fruyt, F.‘International validity generalization of GMA and

cognitive abilities: A European community meta-analysis’Personnel Psychology56:573–605. (2003a)

Salgado, J. F.Anderson, N.Moscoso, S.Bertua, C.De Fruyt, F.Rolland, J. P.‘A meta-analytic study of general

mental ability validity for different occupations in the European Community’Journal of Applied Psycholo-

gy88:1068–81. (2003b)

Schmidt, F. L.Hunter, J. E.‘The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and

theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings’Psychological Bulletin124:262–74. (1998)

Schmit, M. J.Kihm, J. A.Robie, C.‘Development of a global measure of personality’Personnel Psycholo-

gy53:153–93. (2000)

Schmitt, N. (2002) ‘A multi-level perspective on personnel selection: Are we ready?’, in F. J. Dansereau and

F. Yamarino (eds), Research in multi-level issues: The many faces of multi-level issues. Oxford, UK: Elsevier,

pp. 155–64.

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 30 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Schmitt, N., and Chan, D. (1998) Personnel selection. A theoretical approach. London: Sage.

Schmitt, N.Kunce, C.‘The effects of required elaboration of answers to biodata questions’Personnel Psychol-

ogy55:569–87. (2002)

Schmitt, N.Mills, A. E.‘Traditional tests and job simulations: Minority and majority performance and test validi-

ties’Journal of Applied Psychology86:451–54. (2001)

Schmitt, N.Oswald, F. L.‘The impact of corrections for faking on the validity of noncognitive measures in se-

lection settings’Journal of Applied Psychology91:613–21. (2006)

Schmitt, N.Oswald, F. L.Kim, B. H.Gillespie, M. A.Ramsay, L. J.Yoo, T. Y.‘Impact of elaboration on socially

desirable responding and the validity of biodata measures’Journal of Applied Psychology88:979–88. (2003)

Schneider, B., Smith, D. B., and Sipe, W. (2000) ‘Multilevel personnel selection’, in K. Klein and S. Kozlowski

(eds), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, pp.

91–120.

Schuler, R.Dowling, P.DeCieri, H.‘An integrative framework of strategic international human resource man-

agement’Journal of Management19:419–59. (1993)

Sinangil, H. K., and Ones, D. S. (2001) ‘Expatriate management’, in N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil

and C. Viswesvaran (eds), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology. London, UK: Sage.

pp. 424–43.

Slaughter, J. E.Zickar, M. J.Highhouse, S.Mohr, D. C.‘Personality trait inferences about organizations: Devel-

opment of a measure and assessment of construct validity’Journal of Applied Psychology89:85–103 (2004)

Stevens, M. J.Campion, M. A.‘Staffing work teams: Development and validation of a selection test for team-

work settings’Journal of Management25:207–28. (1999)

Terpstra, D. E.Rozell, E. J.‘The relationship of staffing practices to organizational level measures of perfor-

mance’Personnel Psychology46:27–48. (1993)

Tippins, N. T.Beaty, J.Drasgow, F.Gibson, W. M.Pearlman, K.Segall, D. O.Shepherd, W.‘Unproctored internet

testing in employment settings’Personnel Psychology59:189–225. (2006)

Turban, D. B.‘Organizational attractiveness as an employer on college campuses: An examination of the ap-

plicant population’Journal of Vocational Behavior58:293–312. (2001)

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 31 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

Turban, D. B.Greening, D. W.‘Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective

employees’Academy of Management Journal40:658–72. (1997)

Turban, D. B.Cable, D. M.‘Firm reputation and applicant pool characteristics’Journal of Organizational Behav-

ior24:733–51. (2003)

Van Rooy, D. L.Viswesvaran, C.Pluta, P.‘An evaluation of construct validity: What is this thing called Emotional

Intelligence?’Human Performance18:445–62. (2005)

Von Glinow, M. A.Drost, E. A.Teagarden, M. B.‘Converging on IHRM best practices: Lessons learned from a

globally distributed consortium on theory and practice’Human Resource Management41:123–40. (2002)

Williamson, I. O.Lepak, D. P.King, J.‘The effect of company recruitment web site orientation on individuals’

perceptions of organizational attractiveness’Journal of Vocational Behavior63:242–63. (2003)

Wilk, S. L.Cappelli, P.‘Understanding the determinants of employer use of selection methods’Personnel Psy-

chology56:103–24. (2003)

Witt, L. A.‘The interactive effects of extraversion and conscientiousness on performance’Journal of Manage-

ment28:835–51. (2002)

Witt, L. A.Burke, L. A.Barrick, M. R.Mount, M. K.‘The interactive effects of conscientiousness and agreeable-

ness on job performance’Journal of Applied Psychology87:164–69. (2002)

Witt, L. A.Ferris, G. R.‘Social skill as moderator of the conscientiousness-performance relationship: Conver-

gent results across four studies’Journal of Applied Psychology88:809–20. (2003)

Wright, P. M.Gardner, T. M.Moynihan, L. M.Allen, M. R.‘The relationship between HR practices and firm per-

formance: Examining causal order’Personnel Psychology58:409–46. (2005)

Wright, P. M.Gardner, T. M.Moynihan, L. M.Park, H.Gerhart, B.Delery, J.‘Measurement error in research on

human resources and firm performance: Additional data and suggestions for future research’Personnel Psy-

chology54:875–902. (2001)

Zeidner, M.Matthews, G.Roberts, R. D.‘Emotional intelligence in the workplace: A critical review’Applied Psy-

chology: An International Review53:371–99. (2004)

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 32 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management

• recruiting

• turban

• criterion-related validity

• research staff

• personality inventories

• employee selection

• job choice

https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857021496

SAGE

© SAGE 2010

SAGE Reference

Page 33 of 33 The SAGE Handbook of Human Resource Management